From the Nov 13 – Nov 19, 2003 issue

News

Five to Four

No Change at City Hall

by Josh Feit

As someone who spends a lot of time trashing the Seattle City Council, I'm actually disappointed about the trashing voters gave council on Election Day. I'm not disappointed that incumbents were tossed. I'm disappointed in why they were tossed. I've been criticizing council all year because they don't seem to have an agenda or generate legislation--and in turn, they've allowed the mayor's Paul Allen agenda to fill the void. Basically, Seattle's got a set of nine legislators who don't legislate. This year's election, in which challengers lacking any legislative mission deposed the incumbents, obviously did not address or change that fundamental problem.

First, though, I'm not disappointed that incumbents Margaret Pageler, Heidi Wills, and even Judy Nicastro got the heave-ho. The Stranger strongly opposed Pageler's politics, and I'm thrilled she lost. Heck, in some way, I hope I contributed to Pageler's downfall by breaking the story about her secret job search at the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce last year, and by writing about her culpability in Seattle City Light's debt disaster.

Weirdly, I was also quietly happy about Wills' loss. Though The Stranger endorsed Wills (we even put her on our cover), it felt contrived and frustrating to support her. We wanted so much to like Wills (she's brainy and talked like a committed progressive), but her rap invariably crumbled in the arena of get-along-to-go-along Seattle politics. Typical example: The day before the election, Wills scuttled an excellent renters' rights amendment ["Kissing Up to Landlords," Erica C. Barnett, Nov 6].

As for Nicastro, I can't say I'm happy she's gone. She was a badass legislator that The Stranger endorsed with uncontrived enthusiasm. (The aforementioned tenants' amendment was hers.) But I also have to admit she dug her own political grave. Nicastro was a bundle of fuck-ups that constantly frustrated me (her flip-flop on firing Gary Zarker was a misguided low). And so, even in the case of Nicastro, I see that voters had an excuse to dump her.

That excuse, though, was ultimately off-point. Voters were angry with "immature" council members who ignored the "basics." It was a sentiment whipped up by political consultants and the Seattle Times editorial board. And so voters rewarded vague challengers Tom Rasmussen, David Della, and Jean Godden with a nebulous mandate for "maturity" (a euphemism, by the way, for a willingness to abide by the status quo), rather than electing candidates with legislative to-do lists.

That's why I'm disappointed in this year's upheaval. Voters wasted their clout on a misguided demand for "maturity" and "basics" (there was nothing more basic than Nicastro's renters' rights work, by the way) instead of addressing the real malfunction at city hall: The legislative branch doesn't have a legislative agenda.

During the campaign, Rasmussen, Della, and Godden said very little about the specific legislation they planned to bring forward. That's not a good sign, and it should temper voters' confidence that they sent a worthwhile message on Election Day.

josh@thestranger.com